Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Boone and Crocket club so annoying!!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MMERSS" data-source="post: 1084124" data-attributes="member: 63748"><p><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">Well said and thank you for hunting Montana. The campfire examples do shed some light on how different people perceive long range. But why wait to engage in campfire discussions only during the hunt? Every change I get I'll ask an outdoorsman what they think of long range hunting while out and about. Sporting goods stores are a great place. During general discussion the topic of long range hunting will casually be brought up. It doesn't seem to make any difference be it the person behind the counter or another sportsman shopping. I won't share my preference of hunting or engage in debate. It's eye opening to hear the different comments. What's more important than a position of for, against, or neutral is the "whys" to the position. The year-long campfire talk kind of gives an outside look from the perspective of the hunters and sportsman that live in the community. From most of the comments this past year the perception in my part of the state has been fairly bleak on this subject. Most seem to be both for and against long range at the same time, but mostly against. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">Both for but mostly against at the same time? The best way to try to explain this is with an event that took place a few months ago. A hunting party this last general season wanted assistance with reloading and drop charts. I helped out and provided maximum range accuracy prediction charts based on skills both with shooting and estimating wind reading. One of the hunters was a prior national shooting champion so I was comfortable with his shooting skills and applied a ½ MOA precision potential as part of the analysis as he could easily shoot ten shot groups within ½ inch at 100 yards. Totally ethical hunter in his shooting abilities compared to the other hunters at the 100 yard range. After provided them with a maximum range based on most likely hunting conditions, they were cautioned not to shoot above them. Off they went for the season. Two months ago the hunter stopped by and dropped off a box of 50 rounds asking if I could load up more before the next season. I noticed there were only 6 loaded rounds left. I asked about the hunting season. It turns out of the initial 50 rounds loaded, 6 rounds were used for practice and 38 rounds were taken this year on big game animals with 4 harvests (if you call it that). After further discussion not a single shot hit vitals out of the 38 shots taken. I asked what the problem was with the hunts. The hunters ignored the max range charts and opted to take shots well beyond the listed limits. The majority of the shots were taken trying to finish what the first shot couldn't. In the hunter's mind he was ethical because he could outshoot everyone at the range. After the hunter left, I loaded up rounds for this next hunting season…..3 to confirm zero and 3 to be used for one deer, one elk, and one antelope. I called the hunter after reloading the 6 rounds and informed him to make the shots count as there will not be enough for a single follow up shot this next season. I'm pretty sure he got my message.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">Back to both for and mostly against. Most outdoorsmen I have engaged in conversation with realize there are some really good shooters that can apply skill to make first shot kills long range but at the same time realize there are way more really good short range shooters that can't shoot worth a dang long range.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">If sportsman are going to accept any form of hunting as acceptable, that first round has to count. Boone and Crockett annoying? What about the expert marksmen making a bad name for those that engage in maximum effective range hunting responsibly? Who's right and who's wrong and in who's mind?</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MMERSS, post: 1084124, member: 63748"] [SIZE=3] [FONT=Verdana]Well said and thank you for hunting Montana. The campfire examples do shed some light on how different people perceive long range. But why wait to engage in campfire discussions only during the hunt? Every change I get I’ll ask an outdoorsman what they think of long range hunting while out and about. Sporting goods stores are a great place. During general discussion the topic of long range hunting will casually be brought up. It doesn’t seem to make any difference be it the person behind the counter or another sportsman shopping. I won’t share my preference of hunting or engage in debate. It’s eye opening to hear the different comments. What’s more important than a position of for, against, or neutral is the “whys” to the position. The year-long campfire talk kind of gives an outside look from the perspective of the hunters and sportsman that live in the community. From most of the comments this past year the perception in my part of the state has been fairly bleak on this subject. Most seem to be both for and against long range at the same time, but mostly against. [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]Both for but mostly against at the same time? The best way to try to explain this is with an event that took place a few months ago. A hunting party this last general season wanted assistance with reloading and drop charts. I helped out and provided maximum range accuracy prediction charts based on skills both with shooting and estimating wind reading. One of the hunters was a prior national shooting champion so I was comfortable with his shooting skills and applied a ½ MOA precision potential as part of the analysis as he could easily shoot ten shot groups within ½ inch at 100 yards. Totally ethical hunter in his shooting abilities compared to the other hunters at the 100 yard range. After provided them with a maximum range based on most likely hunting conditions, they were cautioned not to shoot above them. Off they went for the season. Two months ago the hunter stopped by and dropped off a box of 50 rounds asking if I could load up more before the next season. I noticed there were only 6 loaded rounds left. I asked about the hunting season. It turns out of the initial 50 rounds loaded, 6 rounds were used for practice and 38 rounds were taken this year on big game animals with 4 harvests (if you call it that). After further discussion not a single shot hit vitals out of the 38 shots taken. I asked what the problem was with the hunts. The hunters ignored the max range charts and opted to take shots well beyond the listed limits. The majority of the shots were taken trying to finish what the first shot couldn’t. In the hunter’s mind he was ethical because he could outshoot everyone at the range. After the hunter left, I loaded up rounds for this next hunting season…..3 to confirm zero and 3 to be used for one deer, one elk, and one antelope. I called the hunter after reloading the 6 rounds and informed him to make the shots count as there will not be enough for a single follow up shot this next season. I’m pretty sure he got my message.[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]Back to both for and mostly against. Most outdoorsmen I have engaged in conversation with realize there are some really good shooters that can apply skill to make first shot kills long range but at the same time realize there are way more really good short range shooters that can’t shoot worth a dang long range.[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]If sportsman are going to accept any form of hunting as acceptable, that first round has to count. Boone and Crockett annoying? What about the expert marksmen making a bad name for those that engage in maximum effective range hunting responsibly? Who’s right and who’s wrong and in who’s mind?[/FONT] [/SIZE] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Boone and Crocket club so annoying!!
Top